Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this bill with, quite frankly, sadness and deep regret. It is devastatingly sad that Senator Henderson has had to bring this bill before the Australian Senate. This is a bill about antisemitism, which has infected our Australian universities. It is a shame—in fact, it is a stain on the leadership of our nation, under Anthony Albanese as Prime Minister, that we have found ourselves in a position where it is indeed needed.

The Commission of Inquiry into Antisemitism at Australian Universities Bill is a bill that is deeply necessary, but our reality is: it should not be. As we've seen in the months since October 7 last year, antisemitism in Australia has run rampant. The Hamas atrocities of October 7 commenced an incredible wave of domestic antisemitism here in Australia. This bill is needed in particular because it seems that the root of the infection is found sadly and, quite frankly, appallingly in our university campuses. We have seen encampments where students chanting 'intifada' and 'from the river to the sea' are deciding who should be allowed access to university buildings based on their religion. Their stories are deeply troubling.

We have seen stories of Jewish students being spat on and taunted with swastikas. They are threatened and they feel unsafe. In one incident, an expat Israeli staff member's working area was urinated on, and the word 'resign' was scribbled on their desk. We have seen academics saying that Jews don't deserve cultural safety and denying that the rapes on October 7 last year even occurred. The message in all of these stories is that Jews are not welcome in places where they live, they work and they study. The message is that the universities in our great country have closed their doors quite frankly to Jewish people and are intent on driving them away.

It is a fact that in our great country, the tone is set from the top. The Prime Minister sets the parameters for the debate through his actions and his words. And I firmly believe that had Mr Albanese, as our Prime Minister, actually stood up on 8 October last year to defend the Jewish Australians, who were always going to be targeted in the wake of the Hamas attacks, we would be in a different position today. Australians deserve a prime minister who sets the moral boundaries for our public discourse. But we do not have a prime minister who was prepared to stand up on 8 October and call out antisemitism. We do not have a prime minister who was prepared even to set the tone within his own party. A strong prime minister would have dealt with the incipient wave of antisemitism immediately. Why? Because it was predictable. But we do not have that. We have a weak prime minister. We have a prime minister who is focused only on domestic polling. We have a prime minister who has allowed the infection antisemitism to spread here in Australia, and that diminishes us all.

The bill is needed because the only response by the Albanese Labor government to the rampant antisemitism on campus has been to commission an inquiry by the Australian Human Rights Commission. It was a response that has left the Jewish community dumbfounded. We have seen a 738 per cent increase in antisemitism since October 7 last year. It has, on any analysis, grown out of all proportion. As my friend in the other place Mr Julian Leeser pointed out in a speech to the Cook Society:

In the last—

three months—

of 2023, Victorian Police registered 145 prejudice-based crimes, with 102 of those complaints, or 70 per cent, relating to instances of anti-Semitism.

Twelve of the reported crimes, around eight per cent, were Islamophobic.

Let me be very clear: we are against Islamophobia. In fact, in 2019, in the wake of the Christchurch terrorist attacks, the Prime Minister announced an immediate $55 million in grants programs to fund upgrades for religious communities. This was a direct and immediate response to Islamophobia. We should have seen a similar response after 7 October. Instead, what we have seen is a narrative of false equivalence. Worse, the disturbing trend is reflected in the terms of reference for this study of racism on campus.

There is another problem with the Albanese government's weak response: the Australian Human Rights Commission is not a fit and proper body to deal with the rampant antisemitism we are seeing on Australian campuses. It has become abundantly clear in the last eight months that the Australian Human Rights Commission has lost its standing in the Australian community, particularly in the Jewish community. It is no longer an organisation that is seen to be guided by principle. The very clear trend is that the Australian Human Rights Commission is beholden to activists who, in many respects, embody the worst aspects of student politics. It is now seen as a body that advances its own political agenda rather than a body that handles legitimate complaints about discrimination.

Worse, there is a very disturbing pattern of behaviour whereby antisemitism within the commission itself is either ignored or overlooked. There's the engagement of Hue Consulting. Hue Consulting was contracted by the Australian Human Rights Commission to develop antiracism materials. But, at the same time as it was preparing those materials for the commission, its principal was involved in the doxxing of Jewish creatives. To use her own words, the person that the AHRC, the Australian Human Rights Commission, thought should prepare materials about racism urged her followers to 'let these effing Zionists know no effing peace'. She claimed:

… "Zimbos" maintained their positions due to other Zionists "in management", calling them "genocidal fascists" who had moved "too deep into fascism" …

Then there's the Human Rights Commission decision to employ a lawyer who was formerly an employee of the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network and who has publicly reposted statements that describe Hamas as:

… "an effective political player in the struggle against apartheid, oppression and colonisation" which has "achieved remarkable success in preventing Israeli violence in Jerusalem and freeing Palestinian hostages abducted by Israel".

She publicly claimed:

Looking at Israel's psychopathy today, October 7 should make a little more sense to ya'll …

Quite frankly, there are no words. How on earth could a person credibly suggest that the murder, torture, rape and violence of 7 October make sense? How could a person credibly be appointed to hold a position in the body charged with investigating antisemitism?

Then there's the engagement of Mr Nazeem Hussain to promote Australian Human Rights Commission events. This is a man who supports the phrase 'from the river to the sea', which we all know calls for the destruction of the Jewish state. Then, of course, there's the belated decision to stand aside Ms Tasneem Chopra as an antiracism ambassador because she appeared to dismiss the concerns that Jewish women were raped by Hamas on 7 October. Ms Chopra shared posts saying 'Israel has forfeited its right to exist' and 'Zionists are just your common garden variety racists and white supremacists'. Keep in mind, again, that that is one of the faces of the Australian Human Rights Commission, the faces of antiracism. Then there was the decision at last year's Human Rights Awards to engage for entertainment a singer named Kee'Ahn and her co-performer, Yara. They appeared on stage at the Australian Human Rights Commission's premier event of the year chanting, 'Free Palestine,' and claiming that Israel was engaged in a genocide. Then there was the anonymous letter signed off by staff across eight teams in the Australian Human Rights Commission which condemned the commission for not speaking out forcefully—wait for it—in support of the Hamas attacks. The president of the commission said the concerns of staff expressed in the anonymous letter were 'of paramount concern'. Even at that point, months after 7 October, when the Australian Human Rights Commission put out its press release about the antiracism inquiry that was meant to be the response to antisemitism—just wait for it—they conveniently forgot to mention antisemitism.

So the question that, quite frankly, all Australians should be asking themselves is: how did the Australian Human Rights Commission fall so far? Can you imagine any other body entrusted to deal fairly with people's complaints engaging in that type of one-sided advocacy? We would not accept courts that deal with criminal matters publicly arguing for the interests of victims or against the accused. Tribunals that deal with commercial or administrative disputes do not publicly speak for or against the parties. The commissions that handle workplace relations complaints do not publicly make the case for employers or the employees. There is, of course, a reason for this. It is to protect themselves from perceptions of bias. It preserves impartiality and their credibility in resolving a problem. Based on the evidence before us and the actions of the Australian Human Rights Commission, they have lost all credibility when it comes to antisemitism in this country.

Again, it is devastatingly sad that the bill that we have before us today is necessary. It is devastatingly sad that antisemitism has infected our Australian universities. It is devastatingly sad that we have a weak Prime Minister who is not even prepared to set the tone in this country and properly condemn antisemitism in Australia. It is quite frankly an indictment on the Australian Human Rights Commission that they are even looking at antisemitism in Australia. This bill sets up a necessary, credible and sensible pathway forward to root out the infection of antisemitism in our universities through an independent, respected and credible judicial inquiry. It behoves us to fight the rampant antisemitism on our campuses, and it behoves us to support the bill.